This thread is about a technical aspect of the $mini-game. If you don't belong to the game, it might pretty well confuse you. If you're interested in joining the minigame, you'd better check that thread rather than this one.
OK, now the topic :
As you fellow landowners noticed, we're always in a situation where supply is higher than demand, and the price shrinks. I didn't know our country could give so much food to its citizens, and that everyone in Apolytonia could eat as much as they want.
Now, this situation is bad and will get worse : when we'll make more roads and mines, the market will be flooded by our commerce and shields. We'll probably never balance supply and demand, simply because the nobles' demand (shields and labor) will never outweight the supply excess.
The major flaw of the system is that basic supply and demand are the same thing : if Termina produces 6 shields and wastes one, then demand = 6-1 (waste), and supply = 6.
I thought of several solutions :
- don't count the nobles' territory output in the base supply. For Example, Frances has tile 002 (2 food, 2 shields, 1 commerce), which is being used in Apolyton. Hence, base supply in 'Poly isn't 10 (food produced there), but 8 (these 10 - the 2 of Frances' domain).
Doing this would be great, as we really become true suppliers, rather than "extra" suppliers.
However, there are several major flaws : we need a clear map showing all domains, and to whom they belong. Currently, it's hard to know who has the tile W-NW of 'Poly for example. The second flaw is that it would demand much more work to the market assessor.
- count corruption / waste as an extra demand. With corruption being a lower demand, we are currently sure supply will always outweight demand. Inverting this is a simple way to make demand higher than supply.
It would be more realistic IMO too : after all, "waste" are wasted shields, who need replacement.
- completely overhaul the whole supply / demand paradigm. This is a trickier part. We could make demand directly depend from population and military of a city : for example, 1 pop point demands 2 food, and a military unit within the market territory demands one food. By the same token, 1pop and 1 soldier require 1 shield each. etc.
Shield demand could come from the buildings in a city, but I don't know how to do this properly. Indeed, we can't just say : "this temple needs 20 shields to be built, it means 20 more demand. Yay, the prices will go higher !"
We can't say this, because our supply has no actual effect in the game : we could supply like hell, the city won't build faster.
But it's possible to say N shields are wat the state is ready to buy each turn for its buildings (where N is the number of unwasted shields in a city). Unwasted shields will raise the shield demand that already comes from people / units.
By the same token, people and units could have needs in commerce, as much as the state. It could be 1 commerce per population + N commerce by the state (where N is the number of non-corrupt commerce in this city).
These are my ideas, but I know they aren't perfect. Please share yours to solve this problem which will only rise with time : our excess supply over demand.
OK, now the topic :
As you fellow landowners noticed, we're always in a situation where supply is higher than demand, and the price shrinks. I didn't know our country could give so much food to its citizens, and that everyone in Apolytonia could eat as much as they want.
Now, this situation is bad and will get worse : when we'll make more roads and mines, the market will be flooded by our commerce and shields. We'll probably never balance supply and demand, simply because the nobles' demand (shields and labor) will never outweight the supply excess.
The major flaw of the system is that basic supply and demand are the same thing : if Termina produces 6 shields and wastes one, then demand = 6-1 (waste), and supply = 6.
I thought of several solutions :
- don't count the nobles' territory output in the base supply. For Example, Frances has tile 002 (2 food, 2 shields, 1 commerce), which is being used in Apolyton. Hence, base supply in 'Poly isn't 10 (food produced there), but 8 (these 10 - the 2 of Frances' domain).
Doing this would be great, as we really become true suppliers, rather than "extra" suppliers.
However, there are several major flaws : we need a clear map showing all domains, and to whom they belong. Currently, it's hard to know who has the tile W-NW of 'Poly for example. The second flaw is that it would demand much more work to the market assessor.
- count corruption / waste as an extra demand. With corruption being a lower demand, we are currently sure supply will always outweight demand. Inverting this is a simple way to make demand higher than supply.
It would be more realistic IMO too : after all, "waste" are wasted shields, who need replacement.
- completely overhaul the whole supply / demand paradigm. This is a trickier part. We could make demand directly depend from population and military of a city : for example, 1 pop point demands 2 food, and a military unit within the market territory demands one food. By the same token, 1pop and 1 soldier require 1 shield each. etc.
Shield demand could come from the buildings in a city, but I don't know how to do this properly. Indeed, we can't just say : "this temple needs 20 shields to be built, it means 20 more demand. Yay, the prices will go higher !"
We can't say this, because our supply has no actual effect in the game : we could supply like hell, the city won't build faster.
But it's possible to say N shields are wat the state is ready to buy each turn for its buildings (where N is the number of unwasted shields in a city). Unwasted shields will raise the shield demand that already comes from people / units.
By the same token, people and units could have needs in commerce, as much as the state. It could be 1 commerce per population + N commerce by the state (where N is the number of non-corrupt commerce in this city).
These are my ideas, but I know they aren't perfect. Please share yours to solve this problem which will only rise with time : our excess supply over demand.
Comment